Kia Forte Real World MPG

Comments

well its obvious you didn't figure it out right, 52L is the total capacity of the fuel tank not what you used, other wise you would have been stranded and out of gas! It's quite possible you had another 50-75 km left in the tank before it would be empty and also did the low fuel light come on? How much fuel did you put in the tank to cover the 288 km? Is it a 2.0L or 2.4L?

I would run a few tank full recording the amount of litres put in the tank (till the pump shuts off) and record the km covered. You don't know how full the tank was when you bought it as you didn't fill it. Don't go off a fuel gauge as being dead accurate, they never are.

the person i bought the car off filled the tank, till it clicked off,it was full,as i was there.i ran the car with the low indicater light on for 30 km as i wanted to see how many km i could get. the car is a 2.0. it is rated at 573 km per tank,city driving. 288 plus 50(reserve) is 338 km, 235 km short of my expectations,a big difference.i visited kia today for an oil change,inquired about this issue,answer...the car needs to broken in..up to 12 or 13000km(service dept ans)8 or 9000 (sales dept ans). I really like the car and will keep track of my fuel milage and make updates. any sugg to improve my milage apprec.thanks

you still didn't say how much fuel it took to fill it up after driving this 338 km?

The fuel guide figures are a guide to compare various vehicles, it does not necessary mean that you will get it, it clearly states that. The are run under laboratory control conditions so its always consistent. You need to run a few tank fulls recording the mileage covered and the fuel it took to cover that distance.

You are still comparing the range on the vehicle on a fuel tank that is run till empty - that does not happen! Is it a manual or automatic?

don't believe the [profanity removed] from your dealer, your Kia requires no extended breakin as stated in the owner's manual, my Kia was getting close to EPA hwy rating after 2 tanks, and improvement over the next 30K was minimal.

city FE can be affected by many factors:cold weather, especially short trips, it can be up to 50% worsetraffic pattern, rush hour, downtown...etc

try testing on a longer trip, do not top up when filling up, try to do it at the same pump same gas station if possible for better accuracy.

i repeat, do not believe your dealer, you are doing the right thing by posting in this forum..

For the first 5 tank fill-ups (45-46 liters, read at the pump, I usually fill up as soon as the gas light turns on) I was averaging 500-520 km (city driving and air conditioning running, echo light on most of the time).

Then ... in September (still very good weather conditions in Toronto, but no need for air conditioning) I noticed that I could only get 400 km out of the 45 liter fill-up. And now I average 380 km (5 fill-ups so far).

I asked the question at the KIA dealer this week, as I was going to get the first oil & lub (odometer 4000 km, mostly city driving, echo light always on), and I was told that the engine was wearing out and that it's normal to see an increase in consumption. I thought it was [non-permissible content removed] (from 500+ down to 380km ... come on).

What I noticed though, is that when driving on a flat surface at about 50 km/h, no acceleration, the transmission shift to the 5th gear (!) and the engine runs at 1000 rpm. Is that really gas efficient ???

I heard that parameters of the transmission control module can be adjusted to improve gas consumption on some other cars. Can it be done on the Kia Forte 5 and how?

The fuel consumption should be reduced, not increased as it breaks in for the first few thousand km, so that part from the dealer is nonsense. Maybe a sensor is going bad, and the fuel mixture is wrong, or something like that? It does not sound right.

My 2010 Forte 5-speed auto will shift down to 5th gear so as to run around 1200 rpm at 40 mph (70 km/h), but I have never seen it down to 1000 rpm. It should be gas efficient at that speed though.

I GET 16L/100K. CITY DRIVING WITH A VERY LIGHT FOOT. POSTED THIS ON THE KIA SITE ON FB AND NEVER GOT A REPLY. ASKED SALES DEPT THEY SAID CAR NEEDS 8 TO 9000 KM TO B BROKE IN, I THEN WENT TO THE PARTS DEPT, AS I WAS THERE TO GET MY 60 DOLLAR OIL CHANGE,AND ASKED THEM THE SAME QUESTION AND THEY TOLD ME THE CAR NEEDED 12,000 TO 13,000 KM TO B BROKE IN. THEY HAVE MY 25,000 NOW SO TO BAD FOR ME. STUCK WITH IT NOW.

I am having the same problems. Driving from IL to St. Louis, I only got 26 mpg, going 70, using the heat only about a third of the time. I haven't even broken 30 mpg one time. I also previously had a '02 Elantra GT that I loved to death, but it died in a fender bender against a much larger car to my sadness. I have 10k miles on the car, and if anything, the fuel economy has gotten worse, not better. I have the 2.0 L automatic, and the 36 mpg highway rating seems like a filthy filthy lie to me.

If anyone has any luck having anything done in the shop to increase fuel economy, please post. I'm going to be keeping quite a careful log and be looking into lemon laws.

Same here. I actually just pulled up next to a guy with another 2.0L 5-door EX and he said the same thing. 26mpg is the absolute most seen by either of us. I do 80% highway driving which makes this even more ridiculous. It's actual got me looking into swap-a-lease.com. I tried talking to the people at the service department and all I got was shoulder-shrugs and "yeah, we've been hearing that a lot from people". If anyone comes up with something, let the rest of us know!

I am pretty furious. My experience with my 2012 Forte Sx has been less than optimal to date. I liked the "get up and go" that the car had, and enjoy it's look. My problem: by my one year anniversary I have lost the love. There are spots on the hood where you can see white underneath the red paint, suggesting that peeling is on it's way. Dealer says NOT COVERED. SORRY...and to reassure me saide "HONDA AND TOYOTA ARE HAVING SIMILAR ISSUES." That really made me feel better about it!

It has the loud rhythmic engine noise that I have had looked at 3 times now, each time being told "it is normal."....

and now this.....

My car gets about 18 mph city. That is SIGNIFICANTLY less than the 23 that the KIA specs list. SO HOW COME I'm not going to get the benefit that other KIA owners are going to get related to the KIA MPG fraud?

Yes. I have now had my 2012 KIA Forte 5 EX for seven months, and have been shocked at the horrible mileage. I held off, as I was waiting to see how it "broke in." And in-spite of the salesman saying it gets better than advertised; I discounted that, and went with the stickered average. That being the case, and doing 90% highway driving on a 20 mile commute, I was expecting between 31-33 combined, and 34-36 hwy. I am now at 9k miles, and the engine is broke in with no mileage gains over new. I am getting a low of 24 and never better than 29, with an average of 28. I have tried ECO on and ECO off with no difference. I have filled up, and driven our Legacy Parkway on cruise at 55 both directions (40 mile RT), and I got 29.

In a world where we all know every car dealer is a liar, and the government sanctions their lies with economy stickers, our situations are not surprising. As I read more and more of these stories, it is starting to push me to find legal counsel and push for a class action on a contingency, and with any luck we can get them to respond like Hyundai did over their incorrectly advertised mileage. My son recently received a letter from Hyundai apologizing for the incorrectly reported mileage, and told him to take it in to certify mileage and they would cut him a check. They will continue to do this for the time he owns the car, as long as the mileage is certified, and they will do so at the rate at the rate at which he pays for gas. They are offering him a check at the rate of 1 or 2 mpg depending on the vehicle type.

Over a period of one month, I have been trying to speak with representatives at Kia's MPG Reimbursement program about the serious mpg problems of the 2013 (and i assume the 2012 also) Kia Forte 5-Door EX. It took me one month to finally reach someone who apparently had the power to adjudicate my situation. These are the facts I gave that person:

-Over four gas fillups the car averaged 21mpg.

-My driving route on a weekly basis is composed of about 80% highway, 20% city.

-I use the same two gas stations every time.

-My mileage (when I finally reached the right person from KIA) was 2648 miles.

-The "Instant MPG" ratings on the trip computer in the gauge cluster NEVER has read more than 26mpg, despite going 65mph with no traffic for 20 miles on a consistant basis (and yes, I took this reading over the same course of road over 10 times through summer, fall and now winter weather)

-The 2013 KIA Forte 5-Door EX seemingly has the same 2.0L engine and transmission as a similarly equipped 2013 KIA Soul. The 2013 KIA Soul even had the EXACT SAME mpg estimates (before the announcement of the mpg mistakes). The 2013 KIA Soul HAS BEEN INCLUDED in the mpg reimbursement program plan.

-The Forte and Soul are within 100 lbs. of each other (the Forte does weigh more than the Soul which does affect mpg, but the forte has a better air drag coefficient)

-Any driver of the same car or even 2012 model complains of the same exact issue.

I may not be an engineer, and I do realize that there are factors that affect mpg outside the control of the mpg ratings, but prior to having this Forte, I drove probably more than 15 different cars via rental agencies over the past year. Since they were rentals, my primary concern was mpg and not paying more money than necessary. I can say that most of those cars that I drove were pretty accurate in their MPG ratings. NONE of them were even close to being as far off the mark as my Forte.

After presenting all of this information to the one person who supposedly is able to pull the trigger on a decision, I received the same policy book responses that I got from every other representative I spoke with.

The person never once said that any of my points may be valid. The only thing she kept on saying was that there are factors that most people don't take into account and that I should read fuelconsumption.gov to identify these factors. That is it. Over a period of 1 hour of talking. I told her how I took estimates of my mpg over a 4-fillup period (using the method suggested on fuelconsumption.gov) and she said that KIA only recognizes mpg estimates figured individually after a single tank of gas.

Here's the most telling aspect of this situation: None of the representatives I spoke with EVER suggested I take the car to the dealer and have it looked at. No one. To me, this says that they know they have a problem. An informed consumer calls and complains of a serious discrepancy between official MPG estimates and real-world mpg and never once does a single representative suggest that the car be looked at. That is a clear indicator that KIA knows they have a problem with the Forte.

I encourage all of you who read this post to call the KIA MPG Reimbursement department and complain. This is the only way they might (independently) change their policy. When you call, please ask for Tammy. That is the person I spoke with who is at the top of the department (or so I've been told). If everyone calls, this will fill her time with nothing but Forte complaints.

The number is (855) 912-5648 and ask for Tammy.

The other avenues to pursue are media exposure (which I will be following up with Edmunds.com) and also State lemon laws or State Consumer Protection agencies. I am doing both of these and encourage every one who is sick of being lied to or ignored to do the same.

If anyone has better luck than me, please write back and tell us how you succeeded.

have had the specs checked by the dealer? that's not the site to use for your problem anyway, they are just there to answer questions with regards the rebate program, you should be posing your complaint to the Kia Motors US website

The 2.0L Forte engine and the Soul 2.0L engine are not the same. The Forte has used the same Theta II series engine since its introduction in 2010.The 2.0L Nu series engine in the Soul was new for 2012.

this is the EPA tests, note the times/distance and the average speed for the highway and city ratings. Also test vehicles have many thousands of miles too. They are not tested new and also use 100% gasoline at sea-level.

Thanks for the info and links, especially about the engine. That is definitely good to know. It helps no one to present a false argument. I tried finding that info myself (should have just called the dealer) but wasn't able to confirm (hence the "seemingly the same"). I will be dropping that argument from here on out.

Here's the funny thing though. After speaking with KIA reps for one month and using the same information, that is the first time that anyone has corrected me on the engine data. Originally, I tried going through the Consumer Assistance department at KIA, but they always sent my case back to the MPG Reimbursement department.

And trust me, I didn't buy this car expecting a combined fuel cycle of 29 mpg (advertised). I assumed that it would be a little less. But we're talking about 8mpg below what is advertised which could be a difference of hundreds of dollars come year end based on continued driving cycle (which is by necessity very steady).

Also, while my scrutiny hasn't been as focused at other times, I have always taken note of the mpg figures for other cars I have driven (not a small sum) in the recent past. This includes being able to post a real-world mpg of 26 (combined) for a 2013 ford mustang V6 (what I was doing renting a mustang and then driving it like a 1st gen toyota prius is a completely different story) over the course of two fillups.

The numbers are always different than what is advertised and I understand why. It is a complicated issue that does require a lot of technical knowledge. But at least a part of the problem comes with KIA's refusal to even consider the issue, despite the fact that the EPA has forced them to correct the numbers for a large portion of their lineup. And parent company Hyundai has had to do the same.

It's not like I'm a bandwagon complainer/opportunist just trying to get some free money. I wrote my first post about this issue before the announcement was made by the EPA and KIA. To tell the truth, I really like the Forte overall. Unfortunately, budget is a very serious concern of mine and every dollar has to be watched and accounted for. Spending $40-70 more than was budgeted (when I bought the car the budgeted for a combined mpg of only 26, the posted city cycle for mpg) every month makes a difference for me.

If anyone else has data or info that they think is helpful for understanding this situation, I would appreciate it greatly. Thanks!

just a bit more trivia - the 2010 and 2011 Soul used the Beta II series 2.0L engine.The new upcoming 2014 Forte will be using different series engines too.

I would try and narrow down your specific area of excessive fuel consumption by resetting the AVERAGE on your computer gauge for short test sections, which could give you a better guide as to where it might be occurring, even though you claim its not reading right, it would still help you. I find on my Soul (2012 2.0L model) that is sometimes optimistic by .2L/100 km (I'm in Canada) and sometimes pessimistic by approximately the same, so overall its pretty close to actual manual calculations so for all intents and purposes its reasonable accurate to go off it.E.G. set it for the highway driving only, you said 65 mph, then try it again at 55 mph and see what you get. Also reset it for city traffic say for 5-10 miles or whatever that section of driving that you do on a daily basis. It will give you a rough idea when the fuel is being used the most and under what conditions its happening.

On my 2.0L Soul over 21 fill-ups my average is 8.3L/100 km or 28.3 to the US gallon, worse was 9.1 (25.8) and best was 7.3 (32.2). But my driving conditions could be totally different to yours. On short checks I've seen it get as low as 5.3 (44.4) but that soon changes as your driving speed increases.

mave 2010 kia forte 4 door i was told i would get 35-42mpg and i have never gotten that much 30 mpg would have to be the most ever what can be done about this i was lied to and basically raped on this deal i thin kia should be held reliable

The suggestion to reset my mileage would have been a good one, if in fact that digital indicator reflected anything close to actual. The only way to determine actual is to fill you tank at the same station, using the same pump (if possible), and lock the fill handle so that it auto shuts off when full: Don't add more fuel, because that will distort your actual mileage. When your car is full reset your trip indicator (I always do both, time traveled, and average mpg). Drive until near full, note the miles, and fill up again. When you have the total gallons, divide that into your miles traveled, and then you will have the actual. If I relied on my trip indicator, I would drive this piece of crap off a cliff, as the trip says I'm getting between 22 and 24.8 on any given tank.

In Utah another serious consideration is tire inflation. Any location where temperatures vary wildly, your tire pressure can vary as much as 8-10 psi.

Since my last post my averages are between 25.8 and 26.7, no better, no worse, and it does not matter if I'm on the highway all the time, or mixed driving.

I am now at 13k miles and am starting to notice other potential problems. Both of my headlights are collecting moisture internal to the sealed housing. There is a weep tube at the bottom of the headlamp enclosure, but it is not supposed to allow moisture in, rather it's a one way leak tube for condensation. The engine is now starting to make valve noise, as in it either needs the valves adjusted, or its wearing poorly. My first two oil services were at the dealer at recommended intervals (3 & 6k miles), my last two were me doing the oil with a full synthetic per the manual, and Bosch filters. I do not read anything anywhere on the KIA site that suggests anything other than synthetic, aside from the break-in oil.

I have two friends that are attorneys, both of which were willing to take this on as a class action filling and on contingency. If we are able to get a filling I will post that disposition on this site.

Unfortunately I have decided to look into selling my KIA Forte 5 and getting a Honda or Toyota where the actual mileages posted are closer to real world, as per both users groups. The new Dodge Dart also looks like it might be a candidate, but I want to hear actual mileage results prior to moving that direction.

If I were a leftist socialist democrat, I would sit out in front of the dealer with a sign indicating actual mileage as compared to advertised. Fortunately I have a brain and a full time job, so doing so would be nearly impossible. Someone has to pay the tab for the worthless illegals that are infecting this nation.

Mileage ratings attract customers, bottom line. For EPA ratings cars are tested at optimal settings including, but not limited to, over-inflated tires and software adjustments then driven very conservatively. They can do these things because power, handling and durability are not factors in these tests. They give two numbers on the sticker, the higher attracts business, the lower covers their "liabilities."

That being said, my 2013 FORTE came with 26/36 on the sticker. I drive about 90% on interstate highways. At first it was getting mileage in the mid-30s, but the handling was a bit squirrely. The tires were inflated to 40psi though the door sticker specifies 32psi. I reduced pressure to 32. The car now handles like it's on rails but, the mileage now averages @ 32MPG with me usually running about 80 MPH. Routinely driven at 65-70 it averaged as high as 39.

So, this car is doing exactly what I expect it to do, and more. The 6-speed automatic requires no attention, manual mode is fun while protecting the engine from overreving. Cruise Control maintains EXACT speed set. This FORTE reasonably quick, steady, stable and predictable at all speeds yet goes over washboard clay roads with little notice.

Fit and finish, not to mention styling, are impeccable. I may have the best one they've ever built.

The key to high fuel mileage is limiting speed. My car is a 2013 Kia Forte EX 2.0, 6-speed auto. Took delivery 12/14/12 and already driven 8400 miles. My commute to work is a 70 mile loop, 99% Interstate and I've been using that to experiment with this car, resetting the MPG computer and using this wonderfully accurate cruise control. Running 80 MPH the car averaged 27-28 MPG, I wasn't any happier than some others who have posted here. Dropped down to 75-70 for an entire week and averages and MPG went up to 32. This week I dropped the maximum to 65 MPH and achieved between 35 and 36 MPG. Then, tonight I made the entire 35 mile trip at 55 and reached 44 MPG! :shades:

Today I filled up, reset and drove the commute to work at the posted limits of 70MPH for 20 miles and 65MPH for 15 miles. Resulted in an average of 37MPG. Returned home at 55MPH and average remains 37MPG.

Am not resetting until the next fill-up and at that time will do the math and compare the computer's average with the math, miles divided by gallons purchased. Appears that driving some distance at a low speed may re-calibrate the fuel delivery ratios. Will keep you posted.

On Friday, filled up and drove to work the 35 miles at 65-75 MPH, as posted. Work 2nd shift so, when I get off at midnight there is little traffic. Drove home at 55 MPH. Just before I made my off-ramp, though, a VOLVO semi truck nearly ran over me. Since then, Monday and Tues, I have drove home at 65. Also, on Saturday I drove to a carwash in Florence, round trip 40 miles then, Lexington and back, mostly 70 MPH on Interstate but some stop and go in town as well. Round trip 100 miles. On Sunday, went to see my sister, 60 miles over a curvy two-lane at 45 MPH or less.

So, unlock the high mileage your FORTE is capable of. 1. Drive it at least 20 miles at 55 MPH.2. Drive no faster than 70 MPH.3. USE THE CRUISE!

FYI, using the heat puts no extra load on the engine so does not affect fuel mileage. My heater, by the way, will roast a pig! I found the secret to unlocking high mileage.

1. Drive the car at 55mph for 20 miles. This recalibrates the fuel delivery software.2. Drive no faster than 70. Go beyond 70 and you will see your MPG average will begin to drop.3. Use cruise as much as possible. It will set as low as 25.

I've been looking around for ideas on what to do with my '11 EX 5dr 6AT... When we first bought it, we got great gas mileage, getting close to 40 MPG for the summer months and around 34-35 in the winter on the highway (commute is a 40 mile loop, 35 miles on the highway). I stopped paying attention to the mpg for a while and then this winter I noticed that I was filling up a lot more often than I used to, so I started paying attention again. I'm now getting 26 MPG average... and here's the interesting part. Whether we run mostly errands and drive around town for most of a tank or it's 100% highway driving back and forth from my parents 3 hours away, I'm consistently getting about 26 MPG. How can highway mileage not be better than city mileage? I drive a relatively reasonable 66-68mph, so I'm not sure what is going on.

Any ideas? There's a lot of wisdom in this thread and I'm desperate for advice!

You should be getting much better mileage than 26. My commute is much the same except for a 70 mile loop but, even wandering around in stop and go traffic, I range 32-34.

Driving at 55 I can get as high as 44 MPG! Found this to be dangerous on the Interstate as I almost got run over by a semi- TWICE! Be careful where and when you do it. But, after I did that to recalibrate, MPG started climbing. Now, I am running 70-75 with the A/C on and getting 36-39 MPG. Warmer weather seems to increase efficiency. This is probably due to warmer air being less dense, therefore, containing less oxygen. Apparently, these genius engineers calculated this and programmed the system to deliver less fuel to match.

Bought my little Aurora black sedan in mid-December. At first, I was a bit discouraged as my MPG meter wandered between 25 and 30. Then, realized I was having a ball driving the heck out of it! Began experimenting with amazing results. See my earlier posts "Incredible Mileage is Possible" for details.

Try this:

1. Drive the car at 55mph for 20 miles. This recalibrates the fuel delivery software. 2. Drive no faster than 70. Go beyond 70 and you will see your MPG average will begin to drop. 3. Use cruise as much as possible. It will set as low as 25.

Note: Make sure you have ECO system ON, a clean air filter and use the recommended 5W-20 oil, not 5W-30.

Okay, now, I'm driving 70-75, even 80 some, with the A/C on, and averaging 34 MPG on my last tank. First tank I ever put in the car gave me a range of 359 miles. Filled up Sunday and the range showed 411. Monday, I drove to and from work at the posted limits, 65-70 and averaged 37 MPG. Today, I drove to work at 65 MPH all the way and got 38 MPG, on average for the first quarter of this tank-full. Going to stick to the 65 and see what happens. Warmer weather seems to increase efficiency.